[scandium]

Originally Posted by Skybird

And again you have ignored several pieces of simple references to ongoing present events, as described by me and others. simply ignoring anything that does not have a place in your view of things, insisting that your view is right, without founding that claim. It's the boogeyman, it's hysteria, it's Islamophobia - then it should be very easy for you to pick apart every argument people like me are giving, since they al,l are not real, and not based on any real facts. Should be very easy to destroy such arguments. Instead we get evasive phrases, vague references, changes of categorial levels, distractions. This is my last direct reply to you. Talking to a wall is not interesting.

Your view of Islam and its followers is deterministic and monolithic. Monotholic because you lump all the branches of Islam into the same neat and tidy little category, ignoring any differences among them, and deterministic because you take this already flawed and simplified perspective and project from it the views and actions of its 1.2 billion adherents and even the future of Europe and the world while ignoring all other variables outside the Koran and related Islamic dogma. To me this is hysteria of the highest order since its completely irrational to predict that France will resemble say Saudi Arabia based on current birthrate data. This is nuts, plain and simple.

France is not a Monarchy, it is not a theocracy, it does not have the same cultural heritage as Saudi Arabia, nor does it have the same demographics and it is foolishness to extrapolate from current birthrates that it ever will. You, correctly, realize that immigrants do impact the culture of their host country but fail to realize the other side of it which is that they in turn are impacted by it as well and that these changes may not manifest themselves overnight.

Even when we will have lost all and everything, our identity, our history, our culture, our homes and our values, and when we will have become strangers in our own forefather's heritage, you still will argue that Islam has nothing to do with it. In forty years, by the single logic of birthrates, roughly a 60-70% majority of French population will be Muslim, from families that never had any link to european peoples and tribes. No problem for you. The same fate will be suffered by Germany, and then the other european countries. European culture and historical identity as we know it today and since the last centuries - will be completey wiped out and it's remains distorted until they could not be recognized in roughly 80-120 years - due to the simple charm of birthrates of already existing colonies in europe.

This is unwarranted hysteria because birthrates are not static and you're drawing conclusions from them that are not warranted by the data - not to mention so far fetched as to come across, to me, as pure lunacy.

I start to wonder if maybe you are a Muslim propagandist yourself, being so eager to help Islamization of the West at all cost and so stubbornly.

More lunacy . I'm a person with an opinion that is informed by 4 years of studying sociology and such in university; this doesn't make me any kind of "expert" but I am hardly a "Muslim propagandist" (whatever that is).

At least Islam loves you - you also assist it'S 1400 years old ambitions with all your determination, you not only perfectly suit it's needs, you also perfectly obey it's demands (written down black on white, btw, and obeyed by over one billion people worldwide). And you even do not realize it - that is the real joke in it.

Right... because I have an opinion and I share it here. That is the terrible thing you know about universities and democracies: the one encourages critical thinking and skepticism while the other encourages you to share it. Probably we would all be better off without universities and democracy, since then we wouldn't have the means to develop independent thoughts of our own (lest sharing them would get us labled a "Muslim Propagandist" if we dare disagree with such luminaries as Robert Spencer). It never ceases to strike me as ironic just how rigid your thinking and insistence that others conform to it (lest the big bad boogeyman get them) resembles the theocratic demands of your enemy - same **** different dogma.

Before questioning the reputation of Robert Spencer, better make sure that you can compete with his competence on the matter - and that this could be the case I do not see even by way of a hint. That way you damage not his but only your own reputation.

Had already read it, and being myself a product of academia I'm not terribly impressed by someone's M.A. since an M.A. is not guarantee of infallibility, nor does it even necessarily make one an "expert" when their thesis is not even based on that which they claim their expertise in (naturally Spencer takes issue with anyone who points this out, since serious scholars tend to base their work upon a community of scholarship, citing other experts and what not, whereas Spencer substitutes anecdotal evidence and obscure dogmatic references as though they were the same thing - and they are not the same thing). I doubt any serious social scientist would wipe their asses with his popular literature (which is what it is) but being popular literature it never the less has its rabid following who eat it up as though his were the definitive work on Islam.

And no, I haven't written anything of my own but that is the luxury I suppose of being a critic and a skeptic. Spencer, on the other hand, has found his niche and is getting his two minutes of fame - all the more power to him since many gain far more with far less than an M.A. But, as I said, an M.A. doesn't mean you should be taken uncritically or even regarded as any kind of "expert". Generally for that to happen your peers have to review your research and findings and then cite it in their own works or at least mention it in their own academic writings. Where is the peer review Skybird? The guy's written 5 books so if he's at all credible than other experts in this field (if Spencer is indeed an expert) should be discussing his findings somewhere. Show me the discussion (and no, his blog "Jihadwatch" is not peer review in any academic sense of the term).